That's stupid. You don't see Leyland arguing that his player should be suspended for longer.

Anyway, yes I think Cole Hamels was wrong and dumb to hit Bryce Harper and to then own up to it. Even if you did it on purpose (which I still think was unwarranted and uncool, not "old school"), just say the pitch got away from you. You can tell your teammates you did it on purpose, you can tell your friends you did it on purpose, but telling the media you did it on purpose is just stupid.

As anyone who was watching the game knows, Jordan Zimmermann then hit Cole Hamels with a pitch when it was Hamels' turn to bat.

Jordan Zimmermann, however, was not suspended. He was not fined. He was not badmouthed by Jim Leyland.

Why?

Should Jordan Zimmerman Have Been Suspended Also?

YesNoSubmit Votevote to see results

Should Jordan Zimmerman Have Been Suspended Also?

Yes

79.5%

No

20.5%

Total votes: 469

I don't care that Zimmermann didn't admit that he hit Hamels on purpose after the game; he hit him on purpose. The announcers even predicted retribution before the pitch was thrown. When there is overwhelming evidence and motive, criminals in this country can be convicted even without "admitting" they committed a crime.

So, both players did the same thing. Both players hit another player with a pitch on purpose. And yet only one was punished.

That's stupid.

You can say that it's okay because he did it as payback, but is that really okay? If someone steals my laptop from my house, isn't it still a crime for me to go to their house and steal one of their possessions? If I suddenly got a Dexter-esque urge to go out and kill murderers, would I not be a murderer as well?

I'm not complaining at all about the fact that Cole Hamels was suspended, but to not punish Zimmermann in any way is totally irrational. Both pitchers did the exact same thing, and MLB made a completely arbitrary ruling against Cole Hamels.

Two wrongs don't make a right, and Zimmermann's vigilante justice should not have gone unpunished.